November 3, 2009

"And so five years ago it was structuralism, and now it is something else. I practically don't dare use the word 'structuralist' anymore, since it has been so badly deformed. I am certainly not the father of structuralism."

But Mr. Lévi-Strauss’s version of structuralism may end up surviving post-structuralism... "Mythologiques" ... ends by suggesting that the logic of mythology is so powerful that myths almost have a life independent from the peoples who tell them. In his view, they speak through the medium of humanity and become, in turn, the tools with which humanity comes to terms with the world’s greatest mystery: the possibility of not being, the burden of mortality.

"Mortality" is the last word of the obituary written by Edward Rothstein for Claude Lévi-Strauss, who died last Friday, at the age of 100.

Structuralism is the doctrine - according to the NY Times article - that universal structures underly all human activity, even though human activity gives rise to "seemingly disparate cultures." I love that "seemingly." No, NY Times and no, Levi Strauss, if that in fact is your doctrine. Different cultures are disparate, deep down disparate. That's why, if you love your culture, you resist the tyranny that demands submission to the blender.

"But Mr. Lévi-Strauss’s version of structuralism may end up surviving post-structuralism"

Still, the sale of the Structure brand to Sears may well have been what killed him. The budget jeans they made for Target probably didn't help either. 501s, on the other hand, have a life independent from the people who sell them.

"The logic of mythology is so powerful that myths almost have a life independent from the peoples who tell them. In his view, they speak through the medium of humanity and become, in turn, the tools with which humanity comes to terms with the world’s greatest mystery: the possibility of not being, the burden of mortality."

In other words (and/or as I see it) only real atheists are actually handling life well, as the rest of y'all are hopelessly lost in a constant state of delusion because you can't really grapple with the idea you're gonna die.

Does it seem like the pantheon of French intellectuals feature notables that are notable for being notable intellectuals, but no one reads anything they write?

Sarte, Derrida, Rousseau, Malraux, Proust, Strauss-- who reads these guys' books (especially after our goofy college days)? Do we not read their impossible tomes because they're terrible or because their ideas are not difficult and easily synopsized (existentialism, deconstruction, social contract, sensuousness)?

I except Camus who was pretty damn smart, prescient, wrote good books and, for those sins, was ostracized by French intellectuals.